Transfer Tools
February 7, 2014
On Oct. 15 I used this space to talk about “Transfer Trends”; and I took that topic on the road, including it in MHSAA Update meetings throughout the state. I described an “epidemic.”
As I have said and written before (including in this space on Sept. 27, 2011), our transfer regulation is an inadequate tool for the fight ahead of us. It has failed to slow the growth of athletic-motivated transfers even after adoption of a rule for that purpose in 1997. Too few schools have wanted the hassle of alleging and documenting that a transfer was primarily for athletic reasons. In 2012, the leadership of the basketball and wrestling coaches associations, observing that current rules permitted several high-profile transfers in their sports, asked for a much tougher transfer rule – one that would subject most transfer students to a full year of ineligibility. Recognizing its legal responsibility to enforce the most narrow proscriptions possible, the Representative Council responded with more precision.
The new athletic-related transfer rule adopted last May extends the period of ineligibility from one semester to two for those students whose circumstances do not fit one of the existing 15 exceptions to the transfer regulation and where the student has engaged in certain activities during the previous 12 months that link the student to the new school’s athletic program.
If a student played high school sports during the previous 12 months and did one of the activities that linked that student to the new school athletically, the new rule doubles the period of ineligibility. If, for example, this transfer student attended an open gym at the new school, played summer or non-school sports on a team coached by one of the coaches of the sport at the new school, or received instruction in strength or conditioning from a personal trainer who coaches at the new school, then the period of ineligibility would double.
In addition to narrowly tailoring the new rule to the most obvious and egregious examples of an athletic-motivated or -related transfer, the Representative Council also provided necessary notice. The rule has not been “sprung” on students who may have done things before the rule change that would have made them ineligible. Because the rule has a 12-month run-up to consider, the Council provided almost 15 months’ notice. The rule takes full effect Aug. 1, 2014.
This is another example of defining a problem and designing the policy with precision. It’s both most educationally sound and judicially defensible.
An Extraordinary Choice
May 11, 2018
A decade and a half ago when there was a vacancy on the staff of the Michigan High School Athletic Association, my colleague Randy Allen mentioned that I should take a look at an impressive young guy from southwest Michigan. A guy I had never met, or even heard of. A 29-year-old by the name of Mark Uyl.
I did take a look, and a second, and a third. Given his youth, I realized this might be the first person I would hire who not only would outlast me on the MHSAA staff, but who also would be both youthful enough and experienced enough to lead the MHSAA after me.
When, at the conclusion of the Representative Council’s spring meeting on Monday, MHSAA President Scott Grimes announced the selection of Mark Uyl to be the next MHSAA executive director, he said, “It was the easiest decision of the weekend.”
I consider the assembly of an outstanding MHSAA staff, and the swift succession of Mark Uyl to executive director, to be among the most significant contributions of my turn to lead the MHSAA.
Mark has the philosophy, people skills and practical knowledge of local school sports that made him the obvious choice. His connections and communication skills make him an extraordinary choice. He will do great things during his turn to lead this extraordinary organization.